3 ms·

You're right - for specialists and some GPs but not all. About half of the GPs are paid by their roster size, so-called "capitated payment". The idea being a do

You're right - for specialists and some GPs but not all. About half of the GPs are paid by their roster size, so-called "capitated payment". The idea being a doctors pay should be based on how healthy they keeps their patients rather than how many services they administer. I only point that out for our American friends who might counter with "well isn't that a system ripe for abuse"

dmix 7y ago
Really, do you have a source for that? I assumed everything, basically everything public insurance driven, which are most things, are negotiated by the government. Just like how family/walk-in doctors get paid in 15 minutes increments so they try to rush as many patient through the day since they get paid for 15 whether it was a 2min appt or not. Which is why you see walk-ins packed full of people with well over an hour times, because not every meeting is fast. On the other hand, I assumed the specialist got paid for their individual services they provide (and the orignal doctor got rewarded for the referral), since that's what they get referred to do, a specialized service which can be rated. It's also why radiologists ($800k/yt) are the highest paid doctor-type, complicated stuff requires good pay and they negotiate these on a case-by-case basis. Edit: I found a paper talking about capitation in Canada and it mentions that Ontario is the only pr]ovince doing it and not all GDPs opted-into it. This sounds interesting - if a bit trusting of the people reviewing "performance". But I support testing out new payment systems, the current one could use some optimisation no doubt.